4 ms·

Why Can’t the West Admit That Ukraine Is Winning?

4 points by gamechangr 5y ago

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
AnimalMuppet 5y ago
First, because Russia certainly has the potential to be winning. Russia could still wind up with air superiority unless Ukraine is very, very careful. Something could happen to motivate the Russian troops. Putin could decide to start using tactical nukes. So it seems really unwise to assume that things are going to keep going as well as they have. There's a fear that the other shoe could drop and it all turns into a disaster. Also, Ukraine is "winning" by not having been totally overrun. They may not be winning in terms of total casualty counts. (They probably are winning in terms of total armor destroyed.) They are currently losing in terms of territory taken - not nearly as badly as we feared they would be, but they are in fact losing. (The fact that they're only losing a little bit counts as a major win against the expected outcome, though.) So all in all, it's fine to say "things are on an optimistic trajectory" or some such. "Winning" seems a bit too strong, though.
- dane-pgp 5y ago
  That's a fair analysis. The author even admits: > the war is not over, and that the weight of numbers still favors Russia. Is there going to be some phase transition at some point where one or other side runs out of some critical resource like tanks or soldiers or money? What is the weakest link in their war machines, and how close is each side to having that link broken?
  - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
    The "phase transition" might be when Russia's supply situation goes critical. Yesterday I saw a claim that it would happen in three days, so Friday. Is that claim correct? I hope so, and it sounds reasonable... but I don't know.
gvb 5y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30775377 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30775377 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30765200 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30765200 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30762361 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30762361
- metadat 5y ago
  Not just a dupe, but already a trupe. Why do people keep submitting it? The west doesn't have any issue supporting Ukraine. We love the Ukrainians, and they are being invaded by Russia without any provocation. It's a tragic and unnecessary loss of human life, all for Putins vanity. Articles such as this demonstrate how confused some people are and how hard it can be to get good information these days.
topspin 5y ago
"So why can’t Western analysts admit as much?" I would include the Western political class, officialdom and establishment punditry here as well, since there is zero daylight between them. I believe their reasons are self evident. The "multipolar" world is wobbling. One of the poles is mostly fake. That serves to at least discredit the bubble in which they prefer to live, and from which they derive their rationales. This progression is interesting in what it omits: "Most professional scholars of the Russian military first predicted a quick and decisive Russian victory; then argued that the Russians would pause, learn from their mistakes, and regroup; then concluded that the Russians would actually have performed much better if they had followed their doctrine; and now tend to mutter that everything can change, that the war is not over, and that the weight of numbers still favors Russia." The part left out is the endless harping about the threat of nuclear conflict injected in between every point in that progression. The handlers of every Western leader appear to be wearing out the little string they pull to make their charge wag its finger and remind everyone that nuclear war is imminent. Thankfully, despite the naïve plans of so many comfortable Western Eloi, MAD is still 100% in effect, and Putin and all of his commanders know it, right down the the officers holding their 50 year old launch keys. The threats we hear from Russian officials of nuclear consequences aren't foolish merely because they further pariah-ize Russia, but also because they're futilely redundant; you can't swing the proverbial cat without hitting another Western grandee prattling endlessly about the risk of nuclear war. It must be a great relief that at least this one aspect of the pole they've relied on isn't fake. While Putin escalates Ukraine into a world war by dragging in Syrian forces, our leaders instinctually trump any suggestion that we might do more than flood Ukraine with Javelins. The good news is that unless Putin mobilizes the entirety of Russia and fires every conventional missile they can scrounge up Ukraine is going to 'win' this. So perhaps we are best to keep it all at arms length. Still, I feel we're missing an opportunity to make the defeat of Russia happen quickly and decisively, to the great benefit of our planet, and perhaps save a few hundred thousand innocent lives in the process.

4 points by gamechangr 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

First, because Russia certainly has the potential to be winning. Russia could still wind up with air superiority unless Ukraine is very, very careful. Something could happen to motivate the Russian troops. Putin could decide to start using tactical nukes. So it seems really unwise to assume that things are going to keep going as well as they have. There's a fear that the other shoe could drop and it all turns into a disaster. Also, Ukraine is "winning" by not having been totally overrun. They may not be winning in terms of total casualty counts. (They probably are winning in terms of total armor destroyed.) They are currently losing in terms of territory taken - not nearly as badly as we feared they would be, but they are in fact losing. (The fact that they're only losing a little bit counts as a major win against the expected outcome, though.) So all in all, it's fine to say "things are on an optimistic trajectory" or some such. "Winning" seems a bit too strong, though.

dane-pgp 5y ago
That's a fair analysis. The author even admits: > the war is not over, and that the weight of numbers still favors Russia. Is there going to be some phase transition at some point where one or other side runs out of some critical resource like tanks or soldiers or money? What is the weakest link in their war machines, and how close is each side to having that link broken?
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  The "phase transition" might be when Russia's supply situation goes critical. Yesterday I saw a claim that it would happen in three days, so Friday. Is that claim correct? I hope so, and it sounds reasonable... but I don't know.

gvb 5y ago

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30775377 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30775377 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30765200 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30765200 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30762361 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30762361

metadat 5y ago
Not just a dupe, but already a trupe. Why do people keep submitting it? The west doesn't have any issue supporting Ukraine. We love the Ukrainians, and they are being invaded by Russia without any provocation. It's a tragic and unnecessary loss of human life, all for Putins vanity. Articles such as this demonstrate how confused some people are and how hard it can be to get good information these days.

topspin 5y ago

"So why can’t Western analysts admit as much?" I would include the Western political class, officialdom and establishment punditry here as well, since there is zero daylight between them. I believe their reasons are self evident. The "multipolar" world is wobbling. One of the poles is mostly fake. That serves to at least discredit the bubble in which they prefer to live, and from which they derive their rationales. This progression is interesting in what it omits: "Most professional scholars of the Russian military first predicted a quick and decisive Russian victory; then argued that the Russians would pause, learn from their mistakes, and regroup; then concluded that the Russians would actually have performed much better if they had followed their doctrine; and now tend to mutter that everything can change, that the war is not over, and that the weight of numbers still favors Russia." The part left out is the endless harping about the threat of nuclear conflict injected in between every point in that progression. The handlers of every Western leader appear to be wearing out the little string they pull to make their charge wag its finger and remind everyone that nuclear war is imminent. Thankfully, despite the naïve plans of so many comfortable Western Eloi, MAD is still 100% in effect, and Putin and all of his commanders know it, right down the the officers holding their 50 year old launch keys. The threats we hear from Russian officials of nuclear consequences aren't foolish merely because they further pariah-ize Russia, but also because they're futilely redundant; you can't swing the proverbial cat without hitting another Western grandee prattling endlessly about the risk of nuclear war. It must be a great relief that at least this one aspect of the pole they've relied on isn't fake. While Putin escalates Ukraine into a world war by dragging in Syrian forces, our leaders instinctually trump any suggestion that we might do more than flood Ukraine with Javelins. The good news is that unless Putin mobilizes the entirety of Russia and fires every conventional missile they can scrounge up Ukraine is going to 'win' this. So perhaps we are best to keep it all at arms length. Still, I feel we're missing an opportunity to make the defeat of Russia happen quickly and decisively, to the great benefit of our planet, and perhaps save a few hundred thousand innocent lives in the process.